I also really appreciate your input and wish we would have had your voice during the development of the plan. I often wished for some discussion about what the plan was actually meant to do/not do. Several on the committee suggested adding specific goals/targets, but I believe that was felt to not be the role of this document/committee. I'm still left wondering where that occurs then? Robbie mentions the Madison in Motion plan. Is that the right place?
I also wholeheartedly agree with your emphasis on on-street facilities. I feel that the most developed part of Madison bike infrastructure is the off-street path network. This is an incredibly valuable component of our system, but does not satisfy the needs of most transportation cyclists. To be fair, many of our streets do include a bike lane, but this usually only happens when it's easy and the lanes themselves are often inadequate. We have not embraced protected/buffered bike lanes. We have one protected contraflow lane on University and one buffered lane on Segoe. Anything else? I truly don't understand how we continue to design a 5' unbuffered/unprotected bike lane on 4-6 lane road projects with design speeds north of 30 mph (CTH M project). This just seems so out of touch with what we know about good bike infrastructure design and does not support 8-80 ridership. I'm unaware of a time that we've actually made a decision to support people on bikes that reduces access for people in cars. The closest thing I can think of is the addition of bike lanes on N. Sherman. In reality, the redesign there was as much about reducing motor vehicle collisions and there was a high degree of confidence that the new design would not signifcantly increase travel times for MVs. We're currently redoing a vital intersection in our city (Midvale and Mineral Point) and the new design has no accommodations for people on bikes. This will continue to effectively restrict bike access to both of these incredibly important routes. Gammon Rd and Odana are two other primary routes that make no accommodation for people on bikes. The Stoughton Rd and Hwy 30 coorridors are other bike deserts. Some of our most valuable retail and entertainment corridors--Willy/Atwood and Monroe--don't effectively accommodate people on bikes. At some point, we're going to have to impact MV access if we want to increase it for bikes. We can't simply continue to creat 'alternative' routes and allow MV use to dominate our primary roadways. Most of the low-hanging fruit (high-value, low-impact on MV operators) has been plucked long ago and we're really at the point that we're no longer going to be able to simply add more right of way and more concrete to tack on a bike lane. At some point we're going to need to repurpose existing space from MVs to the benefit of people on feet and bikes and transit. (The elephant here being the political cost of making "traffic worse".) I also really appreciate your comments on the 'lack of good evidence for the efficacy of bike rodeos, safety towns and youth safety education'. I'm concerned that our overemphasis on bike safety for kids (especially in the forms it typically takes) reinforces the myth that biking is dangerous and harms efforts to get more kids on bikes more often. Teaching our kids to bike safely is important, but is probably best handled by riding bikes with kids regularly and showing them how it's done. Grant On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Robbie Webber <[email protected]> wrote: > Hank - > > Thanks for writing that. I agree with your analysis, and am disheartened > that this plan will also serve as the basis for the bicycle component of > the City of Madison Transportation Master Plan. > > The MPO is not able to set policy, yet they are the regional > transportation planning body. This is the closest thing that we have to an > actual transportation planning and policy for the area that both feeds into > and influences the travel patterns of Madison. The city doesn't really do > transportation policy, and the planning seems to be about facilities, and > not other elements: actually proactively trying to get more people to bike > (or walk, take the bus, use multiple modes, drive off-peak hour, or other > ways to reduce the burden of driving on the general public and > infrastructure.) > > There are "recommendations," but not goals. There are trends, but not > policy. Nowhere does it say, "We aim to fix these gaps and increase both > the mode share and absolute number of bike trips within the next ten > years." Nowhere is there a goal to have an increased percentage of the > metropolitan area be within 1/4 mile of a primary bike route. Nowhere is > there a list of the actual metric that should be used to see progress. > > And there is no talk about integrating bicycling with other modes. > Park-and-bike lots, better bike parking at Metro transfer points and major > other hubs, increased use and network of BCycle as part of the > transportation network, etc. > > I feel partly responsible for the lack of hard metrics and policy, since I > was on the advisory committee for the report. But we were frequently asked > about the network, but not the overall goals. It wasn't until fairly > recently that I realized what was missing. > > Even if this plan is adopted tonight, we can still work on the Madison in > Motion (Transportation Master Plan) and elements in other communities. > > I hope others on this list will also push for goals and policy at the city > level. Fill the gaps, increase the numbers (and make sure we have good, > regular bike counts to document that), integrate bicycling into daily life > through city programs. > > Robbie Webber > Transportation Policy Analyst > 608-263-9984 (o) > 608-225-0002 (c) > [email protected] > All opinions expressed are my own and do not necessarily reflect those of > my employer or any other group with which I am affiliated. > > On Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 8:46 AM, Hank Weiss <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Everyone: >> >> My first post. My family has returned to Madison after a very long >> absence. Great to be back to a GREAT city. >> >> FYI, I am sure many of you know the Bicycle Transportation Plan for the >> Madison Metropolitan Area and Dane County is working on a plan >> for improving bicycling conditions and increase bicycling levels throughout >> Dane County. The plan has been online for several weeks and is being >> presented to the MPO policy board TONIGHT. For details: >> http://www.madisonareampo.org/planning/BikePlan.cfm >> >> I think the plan is a really great start with some innovative analyses >> and is chock full of great recommendations. It obviously reflects a lot of >> work. But I also think it is as yet an incomplete (but eminently fixable) >> plan for reasons I highlight in the linked document. In a nutshell, >> it needs to better address connectivity issues, needs more time based >> measureable outcome for the goals, and needs to better address intersection >> improvements. >> >> I personally would respectfully urge the MPO policy board to >> postpone adopting the plan at this time and urge some discussion here of >> the issues I raise and the plan itself. Interested what other people think. >> Apologies if this has been covered, as mentioned, I am new to this list. >> >> My comments on the plan: >> https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=3FC3897D341E4786!138430&authkey=!ABZ_zyaz7cQhrFc&ithint=file%2cPDF >> >> Cheers, >> >> >> Hank Weiss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Bikies mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > >
_______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
